scholarly journals CONVERGENCE PROGRAMMES AS AN ECONOMIC POLICY TOOL WITHIN THE EUROPEAN UNION

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 123-131
Author(s):  
Marta Postuła ◽  
Justyna Sobolewska ◽  
Jacek Tomkiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Economic Policy ◽  
Policy Coordination ◽  
Stability And Growth Pact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
Quantitative And Qualitative Research ◽  
Growth Pact ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Fiscal Imbalance ◽  
The Eu

The article presents the results of research indicating to what extent the convergence programmes submitted to the European Commission prove country’s willingness to improve the fiscal policy in a desired way and to what extent they constitute a mere fulfilment of a formal duty without any actual intent to achieve the indicated macroeconomic parameters. The conducted analyses allow to conclude that the European countries, while preparing the prognostic documents, have a tendency to hide the scale of the fiscal imbalance that reflects a lack of consistency between the current balance of the sector and an increase in the public debt. The results of quantitative and qualitative research indicate that, regardless of the implemented regulatory solutions at the EU level in the framework of the modified Stability and Growth Pact, certain flaws of the tools used for economic policy coordination at the European level are still visible.

Economic Policy Coordination in the European Union

2003 ◽  
Vol 183 ◽  
pp. 66-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iain Begg ◽  
Dermot Hodson ◽  
Imelda Maher
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Policy ◽  
Policy Coordination ◽  
Stability And Growth Pact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Growth Pact ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Formal Rules

There are differing views about the need for economic policy coordination in the EU and about the adequacy of the system that has evolved under EMU. This article examines the case for such policy coordination, then describes and assesses the current arrangements for both ‘hard’ coordination — epitomised by the much-maligned Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) — and the ‘soft’ forms of coordination that have evolved in the EU to complement formal rules. Although the system achieves more than is sometimes recognised, it is shown to have weaknesses. Options for reforming the SGP and other facets of the system are discussed.

THE EUROPEAN UNION AND ITALY RELATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF SUPRANATIONAL FISCAL REGULATION

2021 ◽  
pp. 208-221
Author(s):  
Dmitrii О. Mikhalev ◽  
◽  
Egor’ A. Sergeev ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Budget Deficit ◽  
Stability And Growth Pact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Internal Factors ◽  
Growth Pact ◽  
Discretionary Fiscal Policy ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Stability ◽  
The Eu

The article presents a retrospective analysis of relations between the government of Italy and the European Union institutions in the context of supranational fiscal regulation in 2002–2019. The authors analyze the influence of external and internal factors on the state of public finance in Italy, note the reasons that made it difficult to meet the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact, study the main issues on the agenda in the EU-Italy relations and their evolution. The authors also come to conclusion that unlike the earlier discussions about correcting budget deficit in Italy, current focus of supranational fiscal governance is shifted to preventing it, what challenges the economic sovereignty of Italy and country’s opportunities to conduct a discretionary fiscal policy.

scholarly journals The European Union fiscal policy framework and fiscal sustainability: challenges for the post-crisis environment

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-82
Author(s):  
Urszula Kosterna
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fiscal Policy ◽  
Reference Values ◽  
Public Debt ◽  
Policy Framework ◽  
Stability And Growth Pact ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
Growth Pact ◽  
The Eu

The fiscal policy framework in the European Union was originally agreed upon in the Maastricht Treaty 30 years ago. In the following years it has been supplemented (Stability and Growth Pact) and modified, influenced by the experience of its application practice and external shocks, such as the financial crisis. However, the essence of this framework remained the same - member states are obliged to conduct a disciplined fiscal policy, which, in a nutshell, is assessed by comparing the ratio of budget deficit and public debt to GDP in a given country to the reference values. Even before the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, the need to change the mechanisms for disciplining fiscal policy was widely recognized. High and persistent levels of public debt, pro-cyclicality of fiscal policy, shortage of public investment and the complexity of fiscal rules and their weak enforceability are indicated as unfavorable features of public finance. In 2019 the COVID-19 pandemic came as the biggest shock to the world community since World War II. In the context of the provisions on fiscal discipline, in May 2020 the Commission and the Council activated the general escape clause of Stability and Growth Pact, for the first time ever. This has allowed member states to take the necessary fiscal measures to deal with the crisis. On 19 October 2021, the European Commission adopted a Communication relaunching the public consultation, put on hold in March 2020, on the EU?s economic governance framework. The new governance framework should be tailored to the challenges the EU is facing, including the challenge of achieving a fiscal stance that is appropriate for the euro area as a whole.  There is a fairly widespread belief in the need to move away from rigid reference values, which should be replaced by solutions that ensure the sustainability of public debt in the differing circumstances of member states. The proposed options for the revision of the EU fiscal framework, although justified in theory, have a fundamental flaw - they strengthen the position of supranational institutions and, moreover, open the door to discretion and potentially unequal treatment of member states. These proposals can be seen in a broader context - the federalization of the EU, which would limit the sovereignty of nation states.

Sweden and the European Union

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl Magnus Johansson
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Coordination ◽  
Public Debate ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Policy Outcomes ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Political Opposition ◽  
The Public ◽  
Eu Membership ◽  
The Eu

Membership in the European Union (EU) entails adjustments or changes in national democracies. Sweden joined the EU in 1995, and EU membership has given rise to controversies in the public debate as well as in the academic community. Four main scholarly and related themes are addressed here. First is the discursive construction of the question of democracy in relation to European integration. In an effort to legitimize membership in the public debate, the consequences in terms of sovereignty were summarized in the official Swedish discourse on EU membership as a loss in formal sovereignty but an increase in real sovereignty. The conclusions became known as the calculus of sovereignty. This conceptual innovation entailed a reinterpretation of popular sovereignty, as stipulated by the Swedish constitution, as well as of democracy, implying that efficiency or problem-solving capacity was emphasized more than procedural democracy. Increased economic and political interdependence had created a situation where independent political decisions were seen as ineffective. Second is the controversy surrounding the question of influence and the extent to which Sweden is exerting influence in the EU. This issue came to the fore in connection with the euro referendum in 2003. While some argued that remaining outside the euro would come with a political price—marginalization—others emphasized the lack of evidence for such effects. To some extent, this remains a moot point, not least as a result of the expansion and importance of the euro zone. Third is the question of whether or not there is political opposition, that is, conflict rather than consensus in EU affairs. Recent research claims that (allegedly almost nonexistent) previous research had underestimated the degree of political opposition or conflict, notably in parliament. Moreover, results suggest that there is variation in EU opposition across time and policy areas. However, the key question here should be whether or not there is effective opposition, making a difference to policy outcomes. Several reforms have been initiated to strengthen the involvement of the parliament in EU policymaking, but none has really sought to challenge the balance between parliamentary scrutiny and executive discretion. Fourth is the state and different interpretations of either decentering or centering effects. Whereas some claim that fragmentation or decentralization is the central feature of the Europeanization of the Swedish state, other researchers submit that the predominant tendency is rather centralization, as the demands of EU decision making—not least EU summitry—on national policy coordination have been a principal driving factor in this process. These are the main themes in the debate over the EU and EU membership in Sweden. Included here are a series of analytical narratives and counternarratives, as well as a discussion of important implications for the national democracy and for the distribution or redistribution of power among domestic political actors therein. In sum, any interpretation of modern-day politics must now take into account the significance of the EU, operating through Europeanizing impacts.

EU-Sanktionspolitik in geopolitischen Zeiten: Europas schärfstes Außeninstrument und seine Herausforderungen

IG ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 278-294
Author(s):  
Niklas Helwig ◽  
Juha Jokela ◽  
Clara Portela
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
Global Competition ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Policy Tool ◽  
Restrictive Measures ◽  
Fine Tune ◽  
The Eu

Sanctions are one of the toughest and most coercive tools available to the European Union (EU). They are increasingly used in order to respond to breaches of international norms and adverse security developments in the neighbourhood and beyond. However, the EU sanctions policy is facing a number of challenges related to the efficiency of decision-making, shortcomings in the coherent implementation of restrictive measures, as well as the adjustments to the post-Brexit relationship with the United Kingdom. This article analyses these key challenges for EU sanctions policy. Against the backdrop of an intensifying global competition, it points out the need to weatherproof this policy tool. The current debate on the future of the EU provides an opportunity to clarify the strategic rationale of EU sanctions and to fine-tune the sanctions machinery.

FINANCIAL SUPPORT (NOT TAX) OF THE ECONOMY IN THE EU COUNTRIES DUE TO THE PANDEMIC

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (11) ◽  
pp. 251-257
Author(s):  
Anzhelika L. Gendon ◽  
◽  
Galina F. Golubeva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Economic Policy ◽  
Labor Market ◽  
Financial Support ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Eu Countries ◽  
Euro Pean ◽  
Political Decisions ◽  
Positive Factor ◽  
The Eu

The article examines the financial support (not tax) of the economy in the EU countries due to the pandemic. A comprehensive vision of the situation and strategic planning are the foundation of the Euro-pean Union's economic policy. These qualities help to develop comprehensive measures to stabilize the labor market and entrepreneurship in the countries of the European Union in the context of a global emergency. A positive factor is also the fact that in an epidemic situation, political decisions of various states are aimed at introducing socially oriented measures that support their citizens.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document